myanbar wrote:When declaring a Compound maneuver, my understanding is you declare the dice allocated to both maneuvers. You don't [Deflect & Thrust] for 8 dice, you Deflect with 8 dice and Thrust with some other number of dice. Successful use of Compound gives you bonus dice for the secondary maneuver. Because they're bonus dice, that implies they're in addition to normal dice. It's different language than Band of Bastards had, which makes me think the change was intentional. In BoB it was clear the follow-up maneuvers dice came completely from the results of the first roll. Here, since they talk about bonus dice, I think you're instead supposed to allocate dice to each maneuver. If this is the case, then your Stomp would negate my Deflect, but then I'd still have dice remaining on a Thrust.

COMPOUND wrote:Make an attack or defense as part of a more complex action, striking while your opponent is otherwise occupied. Declare your maneuvers as [Primary Maneuver] & [Secondary Maneuver] (e.g., Deflect & Thrust ). Pay the activation cost (if any) of all maneuvers in the link with Compound up front, then roll per the primary maneuver.

By what I read I'd say no; you pay any activation costs for both maneuvers up front plus Compound, allocate dice for Primary, then roll Primary.

If Primary is successful:

[Attack+Attack]: perform Primary OR get MoS dice towards Secondary in the same Tempo

[Defense+Attack]: defend AND get MoS dice towards Secondary in the same Tempo*

*Now here is something interesting. There are two possible Defenses with Compound : [Deflect & Attack] OR [Dodge & Attack]. Deflect will give you Initiative on success (MoS1). Dodge will give you Initiative on success (MoS1) if you pay +2AC on top. When using Dodge+Thrust, in order for the Thrust to occur,when Dodge succeeds you must pay 2AC to claim Initiative? I believe yes. Otherwise you have no reason to Deflect. Still it needs clarification.

Back to the question: Attacker declares Swing and allocates dice for it; Defender declares Deflect & Thrust, pays Compound AC1, and allocates Deflect dice; before dice are rolled Attacker declares Stomp and pays AC2; Stomp discards both Swing and Deflect; all dice allocated are lost from both sides; no dice are rolled; no MoS is achieved; no Secondary occurs; Attacker retains Initiative; next Tempo.

"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."― Touchstone

GRAB wrote:If used as the primary for a linked maneuver (pg XX), Grab can be used to link into a Snap or Throw maneuver without entering a full grapple

GRAB wrote:if used as a defense (or in a red/red situation) a success will prevent an attack from the limb being grappled and grant you initiative as though from a successful defense

COMPOUND wrote:If you were attacking, a success allows you to choose between carrying out the primary maneuver as per its description or gaining your MoS as bonus dice to perform your secondary maneuver as a bonus action in this same tempo.

If you were defending, a success negates the oncoming attack per the defensive maneuver. In addition, you get your MoS as bonus dice for a secondary maneuver as above, performing it in the same tempo with the same results.

By what I read here, when I am attacking and I succeed I can either have the primary attack take effect (in this case Grab) OR perform the secondary maneuver. By going with the second option (use MoS for secondary in the same Tempo) I am not in a grapple since Grab is fueling the secondary followup instead: leaving only Throw and Snap as the only viable secondary options, due to the fact that Grab can link into Snap or Throw without entering a full grapple; anything else is out of the question.

When I defend successfully Grab does take effect normally - putting us in a full grapple -- and I perform the secondary maneuver; meaning that I can link Bites, Gouges, Holds, Snaps, Strangles, and Throws to my heart's content, rolling Grab's MoS dice for the secondary attack.

Is this rules intended?

GRAB wrote:On a success, you initiate a grapple (see Grappling) and gain your MoS as bonus dice towards the use of a grappling maneuver in the following tempo

It explicitly states that you gain MoS bonus dice towards a grappling maneuver in the following tempo; not in the followup as in the case of Compound which occurs in the same Tempo.

This means that when I successfully (MoS2) defend with a Compound Grab & [Secondary] on Tempo 1 I gain 2 dice to fuel the secondary in the same Tempo (Compound Defense), then another 2 dice to fuel anything grappling related in the next Tempo (Grab effect)?

COUNTER wrote:On a success, you defend as per the primary maneuver but gain your opponent’s successes as bonus dice to add to your pool for a secondary maneuver to be declared and paid for in the following tempo.

If however I used a Counter Grab and got MoS1 - me rolling 3 successes and the opponent 2 successes -- I would get 3 bonus dice (Grab MoS1 + opponent's successes 2) on the following Tempo to perform any grappling maneuver?

GRAB wrote:On a success, you initiate a grapple (see Grappling) and gain your MoS as bonus dice towards the use of a grappling maneuver in the following tempo

This means that if I Grab successfully I can add MoS for a grappling maneuver but not for a thrust of a dagger in his belly? If yes there goes the proverbial knife in the gut.

FALSE ATTACK wrote:Feign a false attack in order to open up your opponent’s line of defense. Declare your attack as a False [Primary Maneuver] and pay the the activation cost for both the offensive maneuver and False Attack. Roll as per the primary maneuver. On a success you can choose between using the primary’s effect as normal, or you may take your opponent’s successes as bonus dice to add to your pool for a secondary maneuver to be declared and paid for in the following tempo.

GRAB wrote:If used as the primary for a linked maneuver (pg XX), Grab can be used to link into a Snap or Throw maneuver without entering a full grapple

Since Throw/Snap doesn't require full grapple when linked from a Grab, does this mean that I can link a False Grab & Throw/Snap and if successful choose between using my Grab MoS or his # of successes, whichever is higher, as a bonus for the next tempo's Throw/Snap?

Resist | Def | AC0 | Grapple Push, pull, or contort yourself in order to fend off a grapple-based attack. Roll vs. Base TN. If successful, you ward off the attacker’s effect and gain the initiative.

Reverse | Def | AC2 | Grapple Twist yourself in such a way as to use your opponent’s momentum against them in the grapple. Roll vs Base TN. On a success, you escape the effects of your opponent’s attack and gain their successes as bonus dice towards a grapple maneuver in the next tempo.

Counter | Def | AC2 | Link Take your opponent’s momentum and turn it against them. Declare your maneuver as a [Primary Maneuver] Counter and pay the activation cost for both the defensive maneuver and Counter. Roll as per your primary maneuver. On a success, you defend as per the primary maneuver but gain your opponent’s successes as bonus dice to add to your pool for a secondary maneuver to be declared and paid for in the following tempo.

Resist will ward off the attack and give you Initiative. Meaning you can attack next tempo.

Reverse will ward off the attack, give you the opponent's successes as bonus dice to be used in the following tempo for a grappling maneuver, but you don't get Initiative. Meaning you must defend next tempo.

Counter will give you your opponent's successes as bonus dice to be used with anything, grappling maneuvers included.

Counter Resist costs the same as Reverse: 2AC. Both grant you your opponent's successes as bonus dice on the next tempo. Counter Resist however allows you to attack since you have Initiative and you can use the bonus dice for anything, not only grappling maneuvers.

Even if it is a typo and Reverse will give you Initiative; even if you can use those bonus dice to fuel anything; even then Reverse and Counter Resist are exactly the same.

But let's suppose I'm wrong and this is rules intended.

What if I counter with a Reverse? I pay 4AC (2+2) and if I succeed I take twice my opponent's successes (once from Reverse, once from Counter) for a maneuver in the following tempo, which must be a defense because Reverse won't grant me Initiative?

"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."― Touchstone

Benedict wrote:By what I read I'd say no; you pay any activation costs for both maneuvers up front plus Compound, allocate dice for Primary, then roll Primary.

Correct. You declare both maneuvers. Pay all AC. Then roll as per the primary maneuver. If you win, you get your MoS as dice to make the secondary in the same tempo. And you don't pay secondary AC again, as you've already paid it.

"You can never have too many knives."- Logen Ninefingers, The Blade Itself

Benedict wrote:What if I counter with a Reverse? I pay 4AC (2+2) and if I succeed I take twice my opponent's successes (once from Reverse, once from Counter) for a maneuver in the following tempo, which must be a defense because Reverse won't grant me Initiative?

Honestly I like this. I laughed out loud when I saw you could Counter Reverse. It's a silly name and a silly effect. I hope it stays, I really like it.

myanbar wrote:I laughed out loud when I saw you could Counter Reverse.

Ditto.

myanbar wrote:It's a silly name and a silly effect. I hope it stays, I really like it.

It would be perfect if it was "Knight & Shrubbery".

On Wind:

myanbar wrote:This maneuver contradicts itself. You're only limited to Hook, Slam, Swing, and Thrust for offense. But then it says you can Compound offensive maneuver that aren't those, even if you have just one weapon.

Why is it condradictory?

myanbar wrote:Now what does it mean to "link into any other maneuver"?

Attacker can:

Use [Hook, Slam, Swing, and Thrust] without breaking the Wind; provided the target isn't rendered prone by Hook or Slam

Link [Hook, Slam, Swing, and Thrust] to [Hook, Slam, Swing, and Thrust] without breaking the Wind provided the target isn't rendered prone by Hook or Slam

Link anything besides [Hook, Slam, Swing, and Thrust] to [Hook, Slam, Swing, and Thrust] and break the Wind on success

Link anything to [Hook, Slam, Swing, and Thrust] with a second weapon/shield and break the Wind on success

Defender can:

Use Deflect without breaking the Wind

Use Expulsion and break the Wind on success

Link [Hook, Slam, Swing, and Thrust] to Deflect without breaking the Wind; provided the target is not rendered prone by Hook or Slam

Link anything but [Hook, Slam, Swing, and Thrust] to Deflect and break the Wind on success

Link anything to Deflect with a second weapon/shield and break the Wind on success

myanbar wrote:If I Deflect & Murder Stroke with 1 die on the Murder Stroke, then could I Deflect it and just let the Wind end with the 1 die Murder Stroke?

Is this a Compound or a Counter?

Compound: You pay up front Compound AC1, Murder-Stroke AC1/0, allocate Deflect dice, and roll. On success MoS becomes dice that will fuel the unopposed Murder-Stroke. Rolling a single success with Murder-Stroke will break the Wind.

Counter: You pay Counter AC2, allocate Deflect dice, and roll. On success you gain your opponent's successes as bonus dice to CP. Next Tempo you can choose only among [Hook, Slam, Swing, and Thrust]. No Murder-Stroke available because of Wind, unless you Compound something like [Thrust & Murder-Stroke].

myanbar wrote:If I Compound Thrust & Beat, then if my Thrust succeeds and I choose not to Beat, would the Wind still end?

No, Wind will be in effect. No Beat occurs, its Thrust OR Beat. Also note that:

WIND wrote:If you link into any other maneuver, or you link into maneuver that uses an off-hand weapon, a success will break the wind.

Meaning that even if you Beat you must roll one success to break the Wind.

"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."― Touchstone

I've already addressed Grab weirdness as it is an Offense+Defense Maneuver, but unlike Master-Strike, the other Attack+Defense Maneuver, Grab does not handle itself well at all in [Red/Red] and [Attack from Defense] situations.

My suggestion is this: Ditch the effect of gaining MoS as bonus dice used to fuel a grapple maneuver in the following tempo. Which by itself is another problem -- RAW it cannot fuel [Compound Grab+grapple maneuver] because they happen in the same tempo; instead it can fuel only Counter and False Attack secondary maneuvers, which is weird at best.

Have Grab inflict MoS dice on opponent instead.

Also have it act as both Attack and Defense -- similar to Master-Strike -- but with a catch:

1. Attacker grabs Defender dodges (or any other Defense maneuver): Here Grab acts as an Attack. When Grab succeeds it inflicts MoS Impact and puts combatants in a grapple.

2. Attacker thrusts Defender grabs: Here Grab acts as a Defense. Roll Grab first, inflict Impact on Attacker, dice are discarded from Thrust first, if any dice are left in there roll Thrust; if Thrust deals damage no grapple occurs and Attacker has Initiative; if Thrust doesn't deal damage for any reason (no dice left to Thrust / no successes rolled on Thrust / no damage is dealt because of AV+BTV) they are in a grapple and defender has Initiative.

3. Attacker grabs Defender grabs. Here Grab acts as both attack and defense. Imho the best way to resolve it is to play it as an opposed roll; the one who gets MoS inflicts Impact on the other and puts them in a grapple, as opposed to example 2.

When one fights barehanded against a peasant knife (or other tiny blade) no ones has an edge on reach as they both have a Hand reach; unarmed fighter Swings and Thrusts for -1b; armed fighter Swings for -1c and Thrusts for -2p. Let's suppose that both are unarmored (AV0), have BTV1, and are of equal CPs.

Reminder:

pg 143 wrote:Most attacks will deal some form of damage. This is usually equal to one of the DRs on the attacking weapon’s profile + The victor’s MoS and Brawn tap value. The defender may then subtract their own Brawn tap value and AV from this to get the wound level taken.

Turns out that in practice Hand reach flesh fists are slightly more deadly than Hand reach steel knives.

If the armed guy could claim a +2CP bonus due to Reach then steel knives are more deadly than flesh fists.

I pounced upon this when I encountered an error in Reverse Grip:

pg 159 wrote:Take your knife or dagger and hold it blade-down or “ice pick” style. This reduces weapon’s length category by 1 (from Close to Knife, from Knife to Hand) and puts any kind of deflection with the weapon at a disadvantage.

If however there was a Knife range between Hand and Close the above issue where fists are equal (or deadlier) than Hand reach blades there would be no issue. The proposed range bands would be something like this:

Hand: An unarmed attack, a cestus or knuckle-duster, or clutching a rock in hand.Knife: Most short knives, broken glass shards, or anything that projects up to ½ft from the hand.Close: Long knives and daggers, broken bottles, or anything that projects up to 1ft from the hand.Short: Short swords, hatchets, batons, or anything projecting up to 2ft from the hand.Medium: Most one-handed swords, axes, or other battlefield sidearms projecting up to 3ft from the hand.Long: Many one or two-handed battlefield weapons, such as the longsword or pollax, or anything capable of projecting up to 4ft from the hand.Extended: Spears, zweihanders, and most battlefield polearms projecting their reach anywhere from 5 to 7ft from the hand.

One cannot help but notice the absence of Emphases. In all honesty, this has been a huge part of melee in 'Bastards. Is the concept being axed, in the process of being designed, or undecided as of yet?

If it is being axed I can only express my disappointment.

If it is in the process of a write up or design all is cool. You can safely disregard all the following.

If you're still undecided I have some suggestions on the matter.

All the suggestions are made with this in mind:

Agamemnon wrote:One of the goals in this edition is trying to make all the fuzzy things less reliant on interpretation. What we're cooking on now (which will color productive discourse on this topic going forward) is the idea of better defining the role proficiencies take. In this case, we're thinking about defining proficiencies as weapon skills with the individual fighting styles represented by the emphasis.

As they stand presently (and this is a very rough outline)

Brawling

Striking

Wrestling

Daggers

Mass Weapons

Existing emphasis

Polearms

Spears

Something to represent the existing polearms proficiency

Swords

Saber

Messer

Cut-and-thrust

And Shield

Longswords

Existing Emphasis

Something to represent greatswords/montante

Something specific to armored-fighting

First things first. For the structure to work some maneuvers are shifted around the board.

All Link maneuvers share their mutual Group: Links and can be used with every Proficiency (as it is now). They cab safely be removed from Proficiency Maneuver Lists.

Heavy Blow, Slam, and Stomp are "relegated" to Basic maneuvers, in the sense that they are shared by all Proficiencies across the board.

Also Heavy Blow is altered. It costs AC1 and it increases DR by 1, period. It can be declared either as a Swing (wild swing) or Thrust (lunge).

Now with the Emphases:

BRAWLINGExclusive Maneuvers: DisarmEmphases

Grappling: Grab inflicts MoS+1 Impact; While maintaining a Hold in a grapple you can switch to any grappling maneuver in the next tempo for free (no AC cost).

Knife Fighting: Gain access to Quick Draw and Reverse Grip maneuvers; while you have Initiative during a grapple gain +2CP at Refresh.

Back when the BoB rules came out a year ago, there was some discussion of how to model I.33/Roland Warzecha-style sword and buckler combat, with the consensus that heavy use of the Bind & Strike Maneuver would be made on offense, especially in red/red scenarios. Now, BoB is out and Scoundrel is the new hotness. Except, as a small (arm only) shield, bucklers have lost access to the bind maneuver. So, how exactly would sword and buckler combat be modeled under the new ruleset?

GLENDOWERI can call spirits from the vasty deep.HOTSPURWhy, so can I, or so can any man;But will they come when you do call for them?

pg 138 wrote:Your choice of proficiency is almost always dictated by your primary weapon or the weapon that your character is using in their dominant hand. If they are holding more than one weapon, this should always be the longer of the two unless they are of even length (see: Duel Wielding, pg XX).

Typo: Dual Wielding.

pg 139 wrote:or the GM wants the visibility to be important to a melee bout

Redudant article: "the GM wants the visibility to be..."

pg 139 wrote:Complete Darkness: Both sides fight at half their total CP.

pg 140 wrote: During a play, the character with the initiative declares their actions and dice allocations first, then the other party then replies with their own.

Awkward. Better reword to: "During a play, the character with the initiative declares their actions and dice allocations first, then the other party then replies with their own."

pg 143 wrote:The aggressor and defender roll their allocated dice in a contest

Nit-picking. Could be reworded to "Both combatants roll their allocated dice in a contest"

pg 143 wrote:The attacker retains the initiative, but they failed to land a blow. They deal no damage and reach is unaffected. The defender manages not to get hit, but they are still on the back foot and unable to gain the initiative.

I get the neutral gender approach, but it doesn't work that well mixing singular and plural like above.

Suggested rewording: "The attacker retains initiative, but fails to land a blow. No damage is dealt and reach is unaffected. The defender manages not to get hit, but still on the back foot, fails to gain initiative."

pg 144 wrote:Dual wieldingMost characters will have two-hands. Sometimes they’ll want to put a weapon in each of them. One of these weapons will be your primary weapon, or the weapon you place in your dominant hand. This is almost always the longer of the two weapons used. The other will be considered a secondary weapon.

Questions:

• If your secondary weapon is a one-handed firearm or a shield of any size, then you use the primary weapon to determine your combat pool as normal.

Meaning that:

A character with Swords 10 Firearms 0 Reflex 4 is at 14CP when armed with a rapier and pistol.

A character with Swords 0 Firearms 10 Reflex 4 is at 4CP when armed with a rapier and pistol.and

A character with Brawling 10 Firearms 0 Reflex 4 is at 14CP when armed with a pistol. (?)

A character with Brawling 0 Firearms 10 Reflex 4 is at 4CP when armed with a pistol. (?)

Is this rules intended?

• If your secondary weapon is of Hand, Close, or Short reach and is equal to or shorter than your primary weapon, then you can use the primary weapon to determine your combat pool as normal even if the secondary weapon would normally be governed by another proficiency.

• If your secondary weapon is of Medium reach or larger, you take a -2CP penalty. If the secondary weapon is also of a different proficiency than the primary weapon (a mace in one hand, sword in the other) then in addition to the -2CP penalty, you use the relevant proficiency with the least rank (If you have Mass Weapons 5, Swords 7, use Mass Weapons).

Meaning that a character with Reflex 4, Brawling 10 (+2tap), Swords 0 will:

When armed with a hanger (sword/short) and a main gauche (brawl/close) is at 4+10=14CP.

When armed with a rapier (sword/long) and a main gauche (brawl/close) is at 4+0+2-2=4CP.

Again, is this rules intended?

pg 145 wrote:You could use a shield to favor your arms, head, and chest, but not head and thigh at the same time without covering the chest and abdomen as well.

pg 145 wrote:Because of the chaotic nature of this sort of fight, reach control is ignored. Being in the right position with one opponent doesn’t put you in the right distance with another.

Have I told you how much I love you guys? Nullifying Reach in multiple opponent situations is GOLDEN.

pg 145 wrote:At the opening of the play, the lone combatant can opt for a contested hazard roll. The lone combatant declares how many dice they will allocate, and any of the outnumbering side may opt to invest as many dice as they please. All parties involved then roll simultaneously.

If there is an environmental hazard in play (ie slippery ground) they have to roll 2 hazard rolls; one for the environment, then one for positioning, which is at disadvantage if the previous hazard roll failed?

pg 146 wrote:If any of the outnumbering opponents tie or beat the lone combatant’s hazard roll, they fight the lone combatant. If only one of the outnumbering opponents tied or beat the lone combatant, then it’s still a one-on-one fight. If multiple opponents beat the lone combatant, up to three of them may engage the lone combatant simultaneously.

What happens if multiple opponents tie but not beat the lone combatant?

pg 146 wrote:During the hazard phase of the play, set aside dice from your CP on a 2:1 basis. You mechanically become a hazard with a req equal to 1 for every 2 dice you’ve spent from your combat pool (e.g., 4 dice creates an r2 hazard). Any opponent that would attack you must overcome a hazard roll equal to the req you’ve created.

Likewise, as above in positioning, how exactly things are handled if there is an environmental hazard in play?

pg 146 wrote:The outnumbering opponents declare their attacks as normal but the lone defender must divide up their CP to defend against each attack individually. This means a maneuver and die allocation declared for each attack they must defend against. If the defender successfully defends against any one of the attacks in the first tempo, they gain initiative and may retaliate against that opponent in the second tempo. (assuming they have any dice left after impact). If they successfully defend against multiple opponents, they may choose which they wish to retaliate against. During this retaliation, the other opponents may not act. If the lone combatant fails to defend against any of the attacks, they will divide up any remaining dice between the next wave of attacks which must be defended against individually as before.

Ok, now I am a bit confused.

Let's suppose a 1v3 situation where all can attack the loner.

Tempo 1: The loner must defend against each attack individually; specifically they all Swing for 3 dice. He Deflects for 2 dice thrice, once for each Swing. Miraculously he manages to get MoS1, MoS0, and MoF0 -- but the successful Swing deals no wound/impact due to armor. So we have a success, a tie, and a failure for the defender.

He gets initiative and retaliation as he defended successfully once.

Tempo 2: Loner gets to retaliate against the opponent he beat -- namely against the one he rolled MoS1 Deflect. By what I read the other two do not get to act in the second tempo, not even the one who scored a hit.

If somehow the defender had scored three successes - one per Swing - he could choose the target of his retaliation amongst all three.

If he tied all three they would get to attack again during the second tempo as they retain initiative.

Correct?

pg 146 wrote:Any time a character has the initiative going into a refresh, they may start the process all over again. If the outnumbering opponents have initiative at refresh and they so wish, one among them can call for a new positioning roll to see if they can get more of their teammates into the fight. If the lone combatant has the initiative going into refresh, they can choose to either provoke another positioning roll or sweep to force a hazard roll on their opponents.

Now I am confused -- again. They MAY or they MUST start the process all over?

pg 147 wrote:3. The defender declares their attack first (maneuver, target, and dice allocated) as well as any dice they will be allocating towards their Speed pool.

"First" is redundant, as the original attacker has already declared his attack and can't change it.

pg 147-148 wrote:4. Both characters roll their speed pools vs base TN. The original attacker is considered advantaged. On a red/red, no one is advantaged. The winner of this contest has their attack land first and is resolved unopposed.

5. If the winner’s attack caused impact, the dice are subtracted from those allocated to the loser’s current attack first and then their remaining pool if necessary. If the loser is alive and has dice remaining from those allocated to their attack, they may now resolve that attack. If there was a tie, resolve both effects and then apply wounds or impact afterward.

Had to re-read carefully more than once to get it. The underlined part should be moved to the end of step 4:

4. Both characters roll their speed pools vs base TN. The original attacker is considered advantaged. On a red/red, no one is advantaged. The winner of this contest has their attack land first and is resolved unopposed. If there is a tie, first resolve both attacks, then apply any wounds and impact on both combatants.

5. If the winner’s attack caused impact, the dice are subtracted from those allocated to the loser’s current attack first and then their remaining pool if necessary. If the loser is alive and has dice remaining from those allocated to their attack, they may now resolve that attack. If there was a tie, resolve both effects and then apply wounds or impact afterward.

"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."― Touchstone